Embryo Project Encyclopedia, Essay Example

Since the case of Buck v. Bell was argued originally in 1927, there would be many differences in this case if it were to be argued today. One of the primary reasons for this is that there is currently a greater understanding of heredity in terms of genetics, which would make the case that imbecility, epilepsy, and feeblemindedness are hereditary completely unviable. We understand today that genes code for traits, and the human genome is extremely complex. Therefore, several genes code for one trait, and we are not currently certain what these genes are. Furthermore, researchers contend that the expression of genetic traits is due to an interplay between nature and nurture, meaning that an environment that an individual is exposed to can control his or her gene expression. Therefore, we cannot completely blame the criminal for his or her actions, as they are in part a product of their nature. In fact, jailing a criminal can lead to certain environmental experiences in prison that alters ones genetics.

Interestingly in the 1920s, it was found that the Buck vs. Bell case did not violate the due process awarded by the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. Furthermore, it supported the eugenics movement, which intended to improve the genetic composition of humans. While there could be some modern arguments that inmates should be sterilized on the basis of their parenting and the likelihood that their future children will be subject to a harmful environment, the weakness of the extension of the Buck vs. Bell ruling was in the fact that the states that implemented had a broad interpretation of the law. Modern lawyers would argue that it is difficult to define the imbecility, epilepsy, and feeblemindedness of an individual and that it is even more difficult to determine the genetic factors that cause these traits. Therefore, it would be difficult to condemn an individual on this basis.

Clearly the Buck v. Bell case demonstrated that the law has the ability to target individuals for sterility that do not have the ability to defend themselves. This should lead to a disproportionately large number of individuals who are poor or have been mistreated to become sterilized. In the modern setting, this would likely result in a disproportionately large portion of racial minorities getting sterilized, which would appear to be a racist act of genocide. For many of these reasons, if Buck v. Bell were argued today, it would not pass. It has no place today in the modern political and criminal justice setting.

Sutherland’s theory of differential association states several points including that criminal behavior is learned, communication and interaction with other individuals facilitate this learning process, learning behavior occurs within intimate groups, criminal behavior is learned in a manner that teaches techniques of committing in addition to the specific direction of motives, motives of a crime stem from definitions of legal codes as favorable or unfavorable, and delinquent individuals tend to provide definitions that favor violation of law. This theory also states that differential associations of legality may vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity, that the process of learning criminal behavior involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning, and that criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values but is not explained by those needs and values (Scarpitti et al., 2009).

In this situation in which a prison inmate is teaching other inmates how to disarm a police officer, it is important for the observing police officers to consider that the communication that is occurring amongst the inmates is occurring in a manner that presents the other inmates with unfavorable directions and helps officers gain a greater understanding of their motives. The police officers can continue to observe the learning in order to gain a greater understanding of the intention of these individuals, or they can intervene to ensure that the learning does not occur. Ultimately, the decision should be made on the basis of what will provide maximal benefit to the safety of the public. In this particular situation, the disarming of a police officer could be used imminently in the prison setting, so it would be necessary to intervene immediately to ensure that no prison employee falls victim to this group. It may also be necessary for the police team to provide the educators with disciplinary action.

Ultimately, Sutherland’s Differential Association theory demonstrates the level of social influence that criminals can have on one another. Prison subculture tends to perpetuate criminalistics behaviors for this same reason. When individuals act in a close knit group, such as they do in prison, they tend to learn from one another. It is important for police to hinder this from occurring as much as possible for the more violent criminals, which is a part of the reason these individuals are placed in isolation. It is also important for police to notice when negative behaviors are being taught and to put an end to them to ensure that criminals are properly rehabilitated.

The four forms of feminist criminology include liberal, radical, Marxist, and socialist feminism. Despite the differing claims of each theory, they evolved to stress how women have not been conventionally included in talks of criminology and provide insight into how women that are considered to be criminals should be treated. Radical feminism focuses on the study of how men came to be in power ahead of women and how this impacts the behavior of women. It ultimately states that women commit crimes most of the time as a consequence of their treatment by men, as risk factors include abuse and drug use. Liberal feminist criminology extends from the same place as radical feminism, but states that women should attempt to resolve the power struggle between men and women using already existing social standards. This indicates that we must explore the needs of women in the context of balancing labor and power between the sexes (O’Conner, 2006).

Marxist feminism demonstrates that the role of women is defined by men. While women who are prostitutes believe they are free to do what they please with their bodies, they are really oppressed workers supporting a capitalistic scheme. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the social constructs that allow for prostitution and determine how to maximally allow these individuals to access their natural rights. Lastly, socialist feminist criminology considers the joining of both the public and private spheres of a woman’s life to end the economic and cultural sources of a woman’s oppression. As a consequence, women are more likely to commit property and vice crimes.

References

Antonios, Nathalie,, Raup, Christina. (2012). Buck v. Bell (1927). Embryo Project Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://embryo.asu.edu/handle/10776/2092.

O’Conner, T. (2006). Feminist Criminology, Female Crime, and Integrated Theory. Retrieved from http://www.apsu.edu/oconnort/crim/crimtheory16.htm.

Scarpitti, F. R., Nielsen, A. L., & Miller, J. M. (2009). A Sociological Theory of Criminal Behavior. Crime and Criminals Contemporary and Classic Readings in Criminology (2 ed., p 211). New York: Oxford University Press.